030607 planning commission
CITY OF NEW HOPE
4401 XYLON AVENUE NORTH
NEW HOPE, HENNEPIN COUNTY, MINNESOTA 55428
PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES March 6, 2007
City Hall, 7 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER The New Hope Planning Commission met in regular session pursuant to
due call and notice thereof; Chair Hemken called the meeting to order at 7
p.m.
ROLL CALL Present: Paul Anderson, Tim Buggy, Pat Crough, Kathi Hemken, Jeff
Houle, Roger Landy, Ranjan Nirgudé, Bill Oelkers, Tom
Schmidt (arrived 7:01), Steve Svendsen
Absent: Jim Brinkman
Also Present: Kirk McDonald, Director of Community Development,
Curtis Jacobsen, Community Development Specialist, Kim
Berggren, Community Development Assistant, Alan Brixius,
Planning Consultant, Steve Sondrall, City Attorney, Vince
Vander Top, City Engineer, Pamela Sylvester, Recording
Secretary
CONSENT BUSINESS There was no Consent Business on the agenda.
PUBLIC HEARING
PC07-01 Chair Hemken introduced for discussion Item 4.1, request for preliminary
plat for a 17-lot, single-family subdivision and planned unit development
Item 4.1
(PUD) to allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of city
code, south of 52nd Avenue and between Pennsylvania and Louisiana
avenues, Avalon Homes, petitioner. This application was tabled at the
February 6 meeting so the developer could provide additional
information.
Mr. Curtis Jacobsen stated that the petitioner was requesting preliminary
plat review for a 17-lot, single family subdivision and a planned unit
development to allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of
the city code. The site is zoned R-1, single family residential. Adjacent
land uses are single family to the north, open space to the west, the
railroad tracks and industrial properties to the south, and the city of
Crystal and park land to the east. The site contains 7.97 acres. Lot area
ratios include: right-of-way and paved area 34 percent, house pads 16
percent and green area 50 percent. The Comprehensive Plan encouraged a
low density residential development for this area. The utilities would be
built by the developer at the developer’s expense. The site grade drops 26
feet from west to east.
The city has had many proposals for this site throughout the years. Most
recently was in 2005, which lead to this application. The City Council
previously selected Avalon Homes as the preferred developer through a
competitive process in 2006.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that Avalon Homes prepared a preliminary plat that
proposed the creation of 17 single family residential lots fronting on
Prairie Ridge Drive on the south side of the site. There are two elevation
rises on the site, a knob on the western portion of the site and a berm on
the northern portion of the site, adjacent to the Crystal properties. The
berm has approximately a 10-foot rise and is heavily wooded. The depth
of the lots allows for retention of the northern berm and the trees on the
berm, which should block any sight lines between the rear of the Crystal
properties and the new development. The developer proposed lot widths
from 68 feet to 91 feet and lot depths of 134 feet to 216 feet. The proposed
price range would be from $320,000 to $390,000. Housing styles would
include ramblers, two story, modified two story, and split style with
square footages to match the proposed price ranges. Three-car garages
would be encouraged. The homes would have a minimum 6/12 roof pitch,
and exteriors would be constructed with stone/brick/stucco/cement board
and/or vinyl siding. All lots would be landscaped to city standards. An
architectural committee would review house plans to be sure all houses
are constructed with a different plan. If approved, the anticipated project
schedule would be for a spring 2007 construction start up with complete
build out within two years.
A sidewalk was proposed along the south side of the roadway and a 10-
foot paved trail would be located between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1 toward
the undeveloped land to the west of the project.
Property owners within 350 feet of the site were mailed a legal notice and
a project bulletin was also mailed to area residents, including the city of
Crystal for the February public hearing. The city of Crystal was sent a full
set of project plans. Six area residents spoke at the public hearing in
February. A second notice was mailed to area residents informing them of
this meeting.
The proposed development is consistent with the city’s Comprehensive
Plan. Through flexibility afforded by the planned unit development
regulations, the developer would be able to meet the subdivision and
platting standards of the city. The proposal complied with the city’s intent
and purpose for a PUD. The developer would be required to enter into a
site improvement agreement with the city prior to the filing of the final
plat. All of the lots in the subdivision would be larger than the city’s 9,500
square foot minimum standard. All setback requirements comply with the
code. Flexibility would be required for lot width only. Rear yard storm
water drainage was identified on the plans. A storm water pipe runs from
north to south through the site between Lots 4 and 5 and storm water
drainage would run through the rear yards of Lots 5 through 15. Two rain
water gardens are located on the site, one at the south center along the
roadway and another in the rear yards of Lots 14 and 15.
Staff and the Design and Review Committee met with the developers in
February and discussed storm water drainage and the comments received
at the February public hearing. The developer responded to all comments.
2
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
Per the city’s direction, the developer revised plans to show a lift station
to be incorporated into the design of the sanitary sewer. The revised utility
plan indicated the location of the proposed lift station, pipe drainage and
emergency overflow area. Revised landscaping plans indicated one tree
per lot as requested by the Design and Review Committee. The pin oak
trees in the rear yards have been replaced by pine trees. Landscaping
along the railroad tracks has been intensified. A silt fence was added to
protect the trees in the rear yards of Lots 3 through 6. The healthy trees
along the berm would also be protected during the construction process.
Mr. Jacobsen summarized by saying the developer proposed a 17-lot
subdivision on the city-owned property. Although the lots are larger than
city requirements, PUD standards needed to be implemented to
accommodate the smaller lot widths.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that staff was recommending approval subject to the
conditions in the staff memo dated February 28.
Commissioner Schmidt questioned whether the proposed lift station
would be above or below ground and Mr. Jacobsen stated it would be
below ground, with only the control panel above ground.
Commissioner Crough wondered whether the city would receive written
approval from the city of Crystal for the use of its sanitary sewer system.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that the city engineer and Public Works Department
were working with the city of Crystal to resolve the connections along the
eastern boundary of the project. The road and water would be the only
connections with Crystal. The sanitary sewer and storm sewer would not
go toward Crystal. A question was raised as to why these connections had
not yet been resolved.
Mr. Vince Vander Top, city engineer, stated that plans had been sent to
Crystal’s city engineer and some discussion had taken place regarding the
street and fence connection by the ballfields at Iron Horse Park. Nothing
had been received in writing. Houle wondered whether or not Crystal
may raise any items that would be a stumbling block for this project. Mr.
Vander Top stated that Crystal’s engineer indicated it would not be in a
position to pay for any improvements. Vander Top stressed that New
Hope did not expect Crystal to pay for the improvements. When a gravity
sewer connection was being considered, which would have disturbed a
portion of Louisiana Avenue located in Crystal, those costs would have
been borne by the developer. The lift station now proposed would not
affect Louisiana Avenue. The storm water would be directed to the ditch
along the railroad and not toward Crystal. The water main connection
would be at the city border, as are several other connections throughout
the city. A question was raised as to where water from Iron Horse Park
drained and Mr. Vander Top stated he expected some of that water would
drain to the railroad ditch, but he was not positive. Water flowing to the
ditch would travel to the east to a culvert crossing. Some of the water
from the development would flow to the existing storm sewer and utilize
3
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
the culvert crossing on the western end of the property. The future
drainage pattern would be similar to the current drainage. Mr. Vander
Top stated that the rate of runoff would be limited to predevelopment
conditions. Therefore, the rain gardens and infiltration would not only
infiltrate water into the ground, but it would hold the water back and
release it at predevelopment rates.
Commissioner Oelkers initiated discussion on the soil borings. Mr.
Vander Top indicated that testing showed some variation of the soils from
west to east. Soil borings taken in the rain garden area indicate sandy soils
six feet below the proposed bottom elevation. Soil boring columns
indicated that there was no water present, which indicated that ground
water would not be encountered on the site. At the time the soil borings
were taken, staff did not know a lift station would be constructed,
therefore, the soil borings taken in the area of the lift station did not go as
deep as the bottom of the lift station. Some ground water may be
encountered in that area, but with the results of other soil borings, there
should not be a problem even at that depth.
The soil borings on the western end of the project did indicate more clay
soils. The history of the site was indicated in the soil borings, including
the fill placed on the site years ago when Winnetka Avenue was
reconstructed. When the roadway and house foundations are constructed
with the project, it would be important that infrastructure not be placed
on this “filled” area. Oelkers confirmed that the project would not change
the rate of water leaving the site. Mr. Vander Top reiterated that even
though the soils are good for infiltration in the rain gardens, overflows
would be built into the project so that, in the case of a large rain event,
when the rain gardens fill up, the water would overflow in a way not to
impact the new properties or the existing properties to the north.
A question was raised as to how the cost of the roadway would be
impacted by the soils in areas fill was placed. Mr. Vander Top confirmed
that there may be some increased cost. The city would be conducting
inspections during the construction of the street and, the developer
understood, that if unstable soils would be encountered, the soils would
need to be excavated and replaced with stable materials. Any costs of the
development are the responsibility of the developer. Mr. Sondrall, city
attorney, added that typically all costs are incurred by the developer,
however, some items could be open for discussion and negotiation with
the city. Mr. Vander Top recommended that the costs be borne by the
developer.
Mr. Brian Bourassa with MFRA Engineering, representing Avalon Homes,
came forward to address the Commission. He stated that they had tried to
address all concerns of the Commission raised at the February Planning
Commission meeting as well as comments from the Design and Review
Committee. He reported that he met with Mrs. Weeks, 5206 Oregon
Avenue, to address her concerns regarding grading and trees. His firm
coordinated on the soil borings, house plans, and addressed design issues.
4
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
Mr. Bourassa added that the model home would be located on one of the
western lots.
Commissioner Svendsen commented that the Design and Review
Committee requested that pine trees replace the oak trees along Lots 3
through 6 at the northern border. Additional trees would be placed along
the railroad tracks.
Due to the fact that the public hearing was closed after comments were
taken at the February meeting, motion by Commissioner Landy, seconded
by Commissioner Svendsen, to open the public hearing on Planning Case
07-01. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
Chair Hemken inquired if anyone in the audience wished to address the
Commission.
Mr. Michael Stockinger, 7133 52nd Avenue North, Crystal, stated he
addressed the Commission in February and expressed concern that he
still had not received any assurances that the burden of the development
would not go beyond additional traffic and noise, such as water in his
yard and basement. He stated he sent letters to all members of the City
Council and only had one member acknowledge his letter, which he
stated he felt did not build trust. He also tried to contact the developer
and did not hear from anyone. He wondered what would happen if the
model home did not sell in a timely manner and construction continued
over several years rather than the two year time frame as proposed. He
did not want construction to go on forever. Mr. Stockinger questioned the
accuracy of the soil borings due to the fact that the last few years have
been drier than normal. He stated he acknowledged that due diligence
had been done since the last meeting. He maintained that if the city and
developer were sure no future problems would occur, he should be given
some assurances that if a problem did occur, someone would be held
accountable. He stated he felt it would be ridiculous for the project to
move forward if he could not be given a guarantee. Commissioner
Crough asked whether Mr. Stockinger had water in his basement and why
he thought he would have once construction began. Mr. Stockinger
replied he did not have water in his basement at this time and hoped he
would not in the future. He did not feel it should be his financial burden if
there ever was a problem.
Ms. Evelyn Weeks, 5206 Oregon Avenue North, New Hope, stated that in
February several commissioners suggested that the developer meet with
her to discuss her concerns with regard to grading and trees. Mr. Bourassa
and Mr. Jacobsen met with her and discussed all her concerns. She stated
that both men were very courteous, which she appreciated, and she was
satisfied.
Ms. Teresa Chapman, 5249 Louisiana Avenue, Crystal, came forward. She
requested clarification that the sanitary sewer and storm sewer would not
be connected to the Crystal system and that the street would not be
5
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
disturbed. She questioned what would happen if the lift station did not
work properly.
There was no one else in the audience to address the Commission.
Commissioner Schmidt recognized Mr. Stockinger’s frustration that
council members had not acknowledged his correspondence to them and
indicated that two council members were in attendance.
Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Buggy,
to close the public hearing on Planning Case 07-01. All voted in favor.
Motion carried.
Mr. Vander Top explained that there was no reflection of water in the soil
boring columns. He stated that the water table does fluctuate by season
and by whether or not there had been a large amount of rainfall. An
expert in this field can look at soil boring columns and determine the
history of the soil by discoloration of the soil and other factors. None of
those things were noted in the borings. He stated the sandy soils on the
east edge of this development are much the same as the sandy soils in
Crystal. Vander Top added that in recent inflow/infiltration studies that
New Hope has an I/I issue with its sanitary sewer system. Crystal does
not, which is reflective of its sandy soils, lower ground water and higher
infiltration.
In response to the inquiry if the lift station did not work, Vander Top
explained it could be a problem for the 10 properties upstream of the lift
station, and would not impact any homes outside of the development. It is
expected there would be a very low flow from the 10 homes and the lift
station would be oversized to provide emergency capacity. There would
be a SCADA system on the lift station so an alarm would go off at Public
Works. There would be two pumps in the lift station, as there are in the
other lift stations in the city, and only one would be required to meet the
demands of the flow. If the power would go out, Public Works utilizes a
generator to run the pumps until power is restored. Commissioner
Nirgudé confirmed that lift stations and the monitoring/ maintenance
were part of the normal operations of the city. Mr. Vander Top reiterated
that all of the lift stations in New Hope have two pumps. One was
adequate, but standard practice was to have a back up pump. Under
normal operation of the lift stations, the pumps alternate hour by hour to
be sure they both stay in operation and wear evenly.
Commissioner Crough stated that the water table was an act of God and
no one could control it. He added that Devil’s Lake, North Dakota, had
been a dry alkali bed and has now risen 26 feet in the last few years and is
flooding the surrounding area.
Mr. Bourassa addressed the concern of homes not selling. He stated that
Avalon Homes would probably not continue building homes if they did
not have buyers. The vacant property would be maintained until such
6
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
time as it was built out.
Commissioner Houle questioned whether or not a high water mark had
been determined. Mr. Bourassa stated that there was no indication in the
soil borings of any ground water to the depth of the soil borings, which
was 15 feet.
Mr. Stockinger reiterated that if the houses do not sell the city would not
receive any property taxes as proposed. The proposal was to construct
homes over a two-year period. He was concerned that construction could
continue for several years.
The draft agreement included in the planning packet indicating a
timeframe until 2010. It was noted that agreement was an interim
agreement to work exclusively with Avalon Homes on the project. The
development agreement, which is a condition of approval, would lay out
conditions of approval of the project and be drafted after Council
approval.
Mr. Sondrall stated that the request by Mr. Stockinger to have assurances
that he would not have water in his basement due to this development
was not, in his opinion, a reasonable request. When someone purchases a
property, they are free to use the property in accordance with the zoning
ordinances and building codes of the city. It was not incumbent upon the
property owner to assure adjacent property owners that they would never
experience any type of problem from the development. There could be
many different reasons that a particular property could experience
problems, such as acts of God, other neighbors planting landscaping that
changes drainage patterns, and so on. If cities required developers or
other property owners to provide assurances that there would never be
any problems, no one would give those assurances and no properties
would be developed.
Commissioner Svendsen reiterated that the development was designed
with rain gardens and overflow areas, engineering documents indicated
that water would not be directed toward Crystal, and the water that
moved around the property would be no greater than in the past. Mr.
Sondrall added that a property owner could not utilize his property in a
negligent fashion that would cause damage to an adjacent property.
Grading, building and engineering requirements, along with zoning and
building codes, are the only assurances that the city could provide that the
project would be constructed correctly. Mr. McDonald added that the city
tried to assure that projects were built according to submitted plans. This
was accomplished through a development agreement, a performance
bond, and professional inspections to make sure that the project was built
correctly.
Commissioner Oelkers commented that the build out of the site would be
determined by the economy. The city could not expect the developer
would construct all of the houses within the two year timeframe and leave
7
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
several houses sit vacant. Mr. McDonald interjected that this project was
similar to the Hillside Terrace project, and there was no timeline placed
on that project. Oelkers added that four of the seven Hillside Terrace lots
have been sold in two years.
Mr. Sondrall added that if the market did not permit the developer to sell
the properties, he would have to leave the land vacant or resell the
property to someone else. It was expected that Avalon Homes would have
completed a market study to determine the sale-ability of the properties.
Commissioner Houle suggested that design guidelines be implemented
for the development and change the language in the development
agreement to reflect specific building materials, including stone or brick
on the front elevations.
Mr. Jacobsen stated that the final documents would be drafted by the city
attorney upon approval of the project. Direction could possibly be given
to the developer on the type of building materials to be utilized for the
exterior of the homes and included as a condition of approval. Avalon
Homes’ intention was to not build spec houses, other than the model,
with the buyers choosing their own building materials. Commissioner
Houle stressed the fact that unless the design guidelines were spelled out
exactly, he stated he felt everything else was just talk. Commissioner
Oelkers concurred and stated that a percentage of stone or brick, etc.
should be specified in the development agreement. He stated that there
were many options for exterior building materials. Developments in other
cities specify exactly what types of materials could be utilized. Oelkers
pointed out that the Planning Commission makes recommendations to
the City Council, but the Council makes the final decision.
MOTION Motion by Commissioner Svendsen, seconded by Commissioner Landy,
Item 4.1 to approve Planning Case 07-01, request for preliminary plat for a 17-lot,
single-family subdivision and planned unit development (PUD) to
allow for flexibility regarding lot width requirements of city code, south
of 52nd Avenue and between Pennsylvania and Louisiana avenues,
Avalon Homes, petitioner, subject to the following conditions:
1.Applicant shall enter into a development agreement (prepared by
the city attorney) and post a performance bond (amount to be
determined by city engineer and building official) with the city to
insure compliance of the approved plans.
2.Comply with city engineer recommendations including approval by
Shingle Creek Watershed Commission.
3.Approval of plans by building official.
4.Comply with city attorney plat recommendations.
5.Developer to contribute funds that were to be expended toward
Crystal sewer connection towards lift station costs.
6.Applicant to pay $25,500 park dedication fee.
7.Comply with the following planner’s recommendations:
A.Demarcation posts are installed at the edge of the rain garden
8
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
easement in Lots 14 and 15, Block 2, with signage to discourage
trespass into the rain garden area.
B.The trail between Lots 1 and 2, Block 1, shall be placed in a trail
easement. The width of the trail easement shall be 20 feet. The
PUD shall require a side yard setback of 10/5 feet from the edge
of the trail easement. The trail shall be constructed prior to the
homes being built on these lots.
C.Installation of the street lights shall be a development expense.
Final street lighting plans shall be subject to city approval.
D.Applicant shall provide one 2 1/2-inch caliper shade tree per lot
located in the front yard.
E.The fence on the south edge of the plat shall be connected to
the park fence in Crystal to discourage pedestrians crossing the
railroad tracks.
8.The homes constructed shall comply with the terms in the purchase
and development agreement.
9.Planning Commission to waive review of the final plat.
10. Twenty percent of brick or stone on front elevation, exclusive of
doors and windows.
A suggestion was made that if Avalon Homes wanted to vary the home
design, it would need to come before the City Council for approval.
Mr. Bourassa stated he felt it was a good idea to specify a percentage of
brick or stone on the front elevation in the developers agreement. Mr.
Brixius added that an adjustment could be made at the City Council
meeting, if needed. It would be better to state a percentage rather than
give a specific height requirement to allow for some flexibility in design.
Commissioner Houle suggested that the Planning Commission review the
purchase agreement prior to City Council approval, due to the fact that
the Commission was suggesting specific items for the development. He
stated he felt it was the Commission’s role as a technical body to review
the purchase agreement and offer suggestions and recommendations to
avoid pitfalls. Commissioner Svendsen disagreed due to the fact that the
development agreement was beyond the role of the Planning
Commission. The Commission’s role was to review the project to see if it
met the zoning ordinance.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Buggy, Crough, Hemken, Landy, Nirgudé,
Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: Houle, Oelkers
Absent: Brinkman
Motion carried.
Chair Hemken stated this request would be considered by the City
Council on March 26 and asked the petitioner to be in attendance.
Commissioner Houle offered a motion for the benefit of the council
members to gain commissioner’s opinions on the use of this property as
9
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
put forth for 17 single family lots.
Motion Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Oelkers, for
Item 4.1 no confidence in the use of this property for 17 single family lots.
Commissioner Oelkers stated he felt a better use of the property would be
as higher density. He felt the Council was giving the property away at too
low a price, due to the fact that the city now would need to construct a lift
station for approximately $100,000. The allocation of dollars would be
better spent for 40 units rather than 17 units. Commissioner Houle
concurred. Houle stated he felt the proposal was not very imaginative. A
better proposal for the property should be found, whether it is for this
density or a higher density. Home values at $350,000 may be move up
housing for some residents. The city has one opportunity to have this
property developed and he wondered if this was the best there was.
Commissioner Schmidt wondered whether there were any other high
density proposals considered. Mr. Jacobsen explained that the City
Council went through a Request for Qualification/Request for Proposal
process nearly six months ago. Two proposals were received, one from
Avalon Homes for a 15-lot subdivision and another proposal by Peter
Long for a 32-unit bay home concept, slab-on-grade proposal. The City
Council chose the Avalon Homes development team to develop the land
on behalf of the city. The Council was not supportive of the higher density
development. The property is zoned R-1 and could have a higher density,
however, due to the large elevation difference, the property is a difficult
parcel to develop. The Council previously indicated it wanted single
family homes.
Voting in favor: Buggy, Houle, Oelkers
Voting against: Anderson, Crough, Hemken ,Landy, Nirgudé, Schmidt,
Svendsen
Absent: Brinkman
Motion carried.
PC06-15 Chair Hemken introduced for discussion Item 4.2, review and approval of
Design Guidelines, city of New Hope, petitioner.
Item 4.2
Commissioner Houle explained that the intent of the guidelines was to
facilitate a conversation among developers, property owners, and the city.
The city did not want to dictate specific terms or requirements, but give
latitude to developers and owners. The city desired to establish common
design guidelines to protect property values and possibly give New Hope
residents a voice in some of the decisions that affect the community. The
guidelines would be applicable to remodeling or expansion projects for
commercial, industrial and multiple family properties of three or more
units. The guidelines would not apply to single and two family properties.
The design guidelines would be applicable to remodeling projects or
additions. The guidelines would be applied to the new addition only, not
10
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
the existing building. City staff, with the assistance of the Design and
Review Committee, when appropriate, would review projects where less
than 25 percent of the existing building area was affected. If a project was
more substantial, the project would be reviewed by the Planning
Commission and City Council. Ms. Berggren interjected that the current
language of the design guidelines states that any exterior changes would
require compliance with the guidelines.
Mr. Brixius added that the design guidelines were intended to be
guidelines and made a part of the Comprehensive Plan, not an ordinance.
The guidelines would attempt to achieve a sense of place to the
commercial areas of the city. In the future, staff would bring forward
ordinance amendments to allow greater flexibility in building placement
and orientation. In the metropolitan area, cities can enforce portions of the
Comprehensive Plan, which carries equal strength to the zoning
ordinance, but the Comprehensive Plan does not carry specific laws that
require variance processes for changes. The design guidelines capture the
overall design theme for the community.
Houle stated that after Planning Commission approval, the Design
Guidelines would be presented to the Council at the work session in
March.
Commissioner Anderson stated that he was concerned with the language
relating to review by staff and the Design and Review Committee for
repainting of buildings. That requirement would require property owners
to provide staff with full sets of plans, at great expense, and Anderson
stated he was not in favor of dictating paint color. Many new
developments in neighboring cities all looked the same to him, and he
was in favor of adding more primary colors to developments to make
them more vibrant and inviting to the public.
Commissioner Nirgudé stated he was open to more color and the change
should be incorporated into this document.
Commissioner Houle indicated the building color section on page 10 was
taken from other cities’ documents in the metropolitan area and he agreed
that there would not be much variety as it was written. He suggested
more latitude with this section. The review committee was agreeable to
this language. He stated that the design guidelines could be approved
with the condition that page 10 be revised to open up the color selection.
The document should be revised prior to the Council work session on
March 19.
MOTION Motion by Oelkers, seconded by Landy, to approve the design
Item 4.2 guidelines. No vote taken. Motion withdrawn.
Upon further discussion, Commissioner Oelkers mentioned that he was
not in agreement with the guidelines dictating the repainting of buildings.
11
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
Motion by Commissioner Houle, seconded by Commissioner Svendsen,
to approve Planning Case 06-15, approval of Design Guidelines, city of
New Hope, petitioner, subject to revising the verbiage under building
colors on page 10 to “vibrant and primary color options are acceptable as
determined to be appropriate for the site through the Design and
Review process.”
Commissioner Schmidt initiated discussion on whether or not a business
had to obtain approval prior to repainting its building.
Voting in favor: Anderson, Buggy, Crough, Hemken ,Houle, Landy,
Nirgudé, Oelkers, Schmidt, Svendsen
Voting against: None
Absent: Brinkman
Motion carried.
Terra Linda Drainage Mr. Vander Top reported on drainage in the Terra Linda area of the city,
located along Terra Linda Drive just east of Winnetka Avenue and north
Report
of Medicine Lake Road. He explained that during a storm in May 2006, an
intense rain occurred in this area which resulted in flooding in the area,
including several homes north of Terra Linda Drive and an apartment
building on Rosalyn Court. Vander Top explained where the overland
flows drained and storm sewer drainage. Last year, the City Council
requested information on past flooding occurrences, potential
improvements in the area, and costs of the improvements. Staff has now
met with representatives of the watershed, the cities of Crystal, and
Golden Valley and will take revised information to the Council in March.
Vander Top explained that any options for improvements would be
difficult, and the Bassett Creek Watershed would most likely need to be
involved in any solution to the flooding problem.
Design and Review Commissioner Svendsen reported that the Design and Review Committee
met in February with the petitioners and a resident who wanted to build
Committee
an addition over an easement. McDonald reported that staff had met with
Item 5.1
another resident desiring to construct a large addition, and an application
may be submitted for the April meeting. Staff would contact the
committee if a meeting was necessary.
Mr. Sondrall confirmed that a structure could not be constructed over a
drainage and utility easement; the easement would have to be vacated.
Codes and Standards Chair Hemken stated that the Codes and Standards Committee had met
on February 21 to discuss several minor ordinance amendments. The next
Committee
meeting would be held on April 11, at 7:30 a.m.
Item 5.2
Comprehensive Plan Commissioner Houle reported that the committee met on February 22 and
discussed policy statements and comments from the open houses. The
Update Subcommittee
next meeting would be held on April 19. The City Council would be
Item 5.3
updated on the status of the Comprehensive Plan at its work session on
March 19, and several committee members would be attending the work
12
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007
session.
OLD BUSINESS There was no old business.
Miscellaneous Issues
NEW BUSINESS
Motion to Approve Motion was made by Commissioner Landy, seconded by Commissioner
Minutes Svendsen, to approve the Planning Commission minutes of February 6,
2007. All voted in favor. Motion carried.
ANNOUNCEMENTS There were no other announcements.
ADJOURNMENT The Planning Commission meeting was unanimously adjourned at 9:06
p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Pamela Sylvester, Recording Secretary
13
Planning Commission Meeting March 6, 2007